Description of Millerago gen. nov. based on taxogenomic analysis, with two new species, Millerago phaffii f.a., sp. nov. and Millerago galiae f.a., sp. nov.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An erratum of this article has been published full details can be found at https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.006591 Four yeast isolates obtained from tree bark and fermenting sap of Quercus spp. and insects in Colombia and Japan were phylogenetically related to Candida galis based on analyses of the sequences of the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region and the D1/D2 domains of the large subunit rRNA gene. The novel species differs from C. galis by 20 nt substitutions and 5 indels in the D1/D2 sequences. A phylogenomic analysis suggested that these species are related to Candida ficus, the genus Phaffomyces and a small clade containing Barnettozyma botsteinii, Barnettozyma siamensis and Candida montana. Our genomic analyses suggest that the novel species and C. galis should be separated in a novel yeast genus. We propose the genus Millerago gen. nov. to accommodate these species and the species Millerago phaffii f.a., sp. nov. (CBS 18021T; MycoBank MB856172) to accommodate the Colombian and Japanese isolates. The Colombian isolate of M. phaffii differs from the Japanese isolates by three nt substitutions and one indel and two substitutions and one indel in the ITS and D1/D2 sequences, respectively, showing that they were conspecific. We also propose the new species Millerago galiae sp. nov. to validate this species according to the rules of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".